Attachment A

Amtrak On-Time Performance for FY 2010
Year-to-Date Totals for October 2009 through September 2010

Test 2:
v Test 1: Constant or
Incaes|__‘Mgtegenonzime | tere
oth, %
tests % Variance

were met Change | Proposed from Change in MPH

for OTP | Fy10% from ‘Target for FY10 from October 2007

Progress | On Time FY09. FY10 Target Baseline
Northeast Corridor Service (Goal proposed for FY 2012: 95%)
Acela 80.6% (6.6%) 92.1% | (11.5%) (1.6)
Regional Service 74.7% (5.3%) 88.2% | (13.5%) (1.4)
Other Corridor Services (Goal proposed for FY 2012: 90% Minimum target proposed for FY 2010: 80%)
Adirondack v 62.2% 4.8% 80.0% | (17.8%) 21
Blue Water v 68.8% 17.9% 80.0% | (11.2%) 19
Capitols v 93.2% 0.9% 83.8% 9.4% 16
Carolinian 48.9% (8.3%) 80.0% | (31.1%) 12
Cascades v 73.0% 1.7% 80.0% (7.0%) 0.8
Downeaster 70.8% (4.1%) 85.2% | (14.4%) (0.9)
Empire Service 85.6% 3.0% 82.7% 3.0% (3.6)
Ethan Allen Express 74.8% 19.1% 80.0% (5.2%) (0.4)
Heartland Flyer 81.4% (24%) 80.0% 1.4% 47
Hiawatha 39.5% | 24% | 89.7% | (0.2%) (0.2)
Hoosier State v 74.7% 22.5% 80.0% (5.3%) 2.1
Uilini v 62.9% 16.7% 81.6% __| (18.7%) 0.0
Illinois Zephyr 4 92.8% 45% 80.1% 12.7% 19
Keystone 87.1% (2.9%) 88.1% (1.0%) (0.4)
Lincoln Service 72.2% (1.1%) 80.0% (7.8%) 2.0
Maple Leaf v 69.0% 8.7% 80.0% | (11.0%) 1.0
Missouri Services v 91.1% 17.5% 80.0% 11.1% 6.8
Pacific Surfliner v 83.2% 0.1% 83.9% (0.7%) 0.1
Pennsylvanian 90.1% (5.9%) 82.6% 75% 11
Pere Marquette v 53.2% 14.9% 80.0% | (26.8%) 2.0
Piedmont 79.2% 3.2% 83.7% (4.5%) (0.4)
San Joaquins v 90.7% 11% 81.2% 9.5% 2.1
Vermonter 85.6% (3.3%) 80.0% 5.6% 0.5
Wolverines v 61.5% 17.5% 80.0% | (18.5%) L7
Long Distance Trains (Goat proposed for FY 2012: 85% Minimum target proposed for FY 2010: 72.5%)
Auto Train 87.0% (1.7%) 75.8% 11.2% LL
California Zephyr 52.6% (7.1%) 72.5% _| (19.9%) 4.6
Capitol Limited 68.3% (2.4%) 72.5% (4.2%) 3.0
Cardinal v 51.1% 54% 72.5% __| (21.4%) 0.1
City of New Orleans 82.6% (0.4%) 85.0% (2.4%) (0.1)
Coast Starlight v 89.9% 7.5% 72.5% 17.4% 2.1
Crescent 73.0% | (11.0%) | 72.5% 0.5% 0.7
Empire Builder v 71.8% 2.2% 80.4% (2.6%) 0.0
Lake Shore Limited v 75.7% 0.0% 72.5% 3.2% 44
Palmetto 64.2% | (2.7%) | 725% | (8.3%) 34
Silver Meteor v 2.8% 0.2% 72.5% 0.3% 1.6
Silver Star v 71.5% 9.8% 72.5% 5.0% 1.6
Southwest Chief 79.1% (6.1%) 75.1% 40% 0.7
Sunset Limited v 87.5% 8.3% 72.5%. 15.0% 4.0
Texas Eagle 69.6% (5.6%) 72.5% (2.9%) 19



U.S. Department Administrator 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
of Transportation Washington, DC 20590

Federal Railroad
Administration

JAN 21 20%

The Honorable Daniel K. Inouye
Chairman

Committee on Appropriations
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Mr. Chairman:

Section 154 of the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2010 (Pub. L. 111-117) requires the Federal Railroad Administrator to
“submit a report on April 1, 2010, and quarterly reports thereafter, to the House and Senate
Committees on Appropriations detailing the Administrator's efforts at improving the on-
time performance of Amtrak intercity rail service operating on non-Amtrak owned
property. Such reports shall compare the most recent actual on-time performance data to
pre-established on-time performance goals that the Administrator shall set for each rail
service, identified by route. Such reports shall also include whatever other information and
data regarding the on-time performance of Amtrak trains the Administrator deems to be
appropriate.”

Tam pleased to submit the quarterly report in accordance with this requirement. I hope that
the information contained in the enclosed report will assist the Committee in its work.

Identical letters have been sent to the Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on
Appropriations, and to the Chairman and Ranking Member of the House Committee on
Appropriations.

Sincerely,

Joseph C. Oe

Enclosures


January 1, 2011

October 2010 Report on Amtrak On-Time Performance
Submitted by the Federal Railroad Administrator
Under Section 154 of Pub. L. 111-117

This report includes two sections: (1) an update on recent Federal Railroad Administration
(FRA) efforts to catalyze and effect improvements in Amtrak’s on-time performance (OTP); and
(2) in keeping with the FRA’s October 1, 2010 OTP report, an update on Amtrak’s OTP results
and performance against FRA-established goals.

(1) OTP Improvement Highlights through August Fiscal Year 2010

OTP Benefits of the High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail (HSIPR) Program: On October 28,
2010, the Obama Administration announced the second round of selected programs and projects
within 23 States under the FRA’s HSIPR Program (a complete list of selected investments is
available at:

http://www. fra.dot.gov/rpd/downloads/Summary_of_FY10_Selected_Projects_1010.pdf).
Through the States, this program is providing a total of approximately $10.6 billion
(appropriations through FY 2010) for incremental upgrades to existing railroads as well as new
high-speed rail systems, all for the purpose of endowing the Nation with a transformative mode
of intercity passenger transportation in heavily populated corridors.

Most of the HSIPR awards will ultimately raise the effective speed of the benefiting services,
through a combination of better reliability (through capacity additions and other means) and/or
higher running speeds. FRA, Amtrak, the States, and host railroads have been working to
develop agreements for the performance improvement(s) in intercity passenger rail service that
are to be realized upon completion of the respective projects. Accordingly, the completion of the
first and second round of FRA’s HSIPR betterments will directly improve the OTP of the
affected routes, as measured in this series of OTP reports to Congress as well as the forthcoming
reports under Section 207 of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008
(PRIA).

Publication of Metrics and Standards: Stemming from the May 12, 2010 publication of the final
Metrics and Standards for intercity passenger rail services (available on FRA’s webpage at
http://www. fra.dot.gov/Pages/2165.shtml), which FRA developed jointly with Amtrak in
compliance with Section 207 of PRIIA, FRA and Amtrak are in the process of finalizing the first
quarterly Metrics and Standards report. This report will provide data on Amtrak’s financial,
operational, and service quality performance during the fourth quarter of FY 2010. A key feature
of the operational data will be the delay minutes Amtrak experiences on the host railroads.
Metrics and Standards data collected for the fourth quarter of FY 2010 illustrates the spectrum of
reliability Amtrak experiences across its system, with some Class I railroads exceeding the delay
minutes standard on most, if not all of the Amtrak trains they host.

The FRA believes that the quarterly Metrics and Standards reports, with their augmented detail,
coupled with related provisions in other sections of the PRIIA (e.g., Sections 210 and 213), will


provide additional impetus for the host railroads and Amtrak to emphasize their collaborative
efforts toward OTP improvement.

(2) Goals and Route Performance

Attachment A contains OTP statistics for all Amtrak routes for FY 2010. As the attachment
illustrates, just under half of the routes (20) had improvements in OTP (in terms of both
improved percent on time and no decrease in effective speed) in FY 2010. Of those routes
experiencing OTP improvement, a total of nine (four corridor-type and five long-distance trains)
met or surpassed their FRA-defined OTP target for FY 2010.

The OTP across the entire Amtrak system for FY 2010 was 79.7 percent, which is less than a
percentage-point decrease from the previous year. The slight decline in system-wide
performance primarily reflected the OTP experience in the Northeast Corridor (NEC), which was
the site of considerable infrastructure renewal activity during FY 2010. By contrast, Amtrak’s
short distance routes outside the NEC (i.e. “Other Corridor Services”) experienced a 1.8
percentage-point increase year-over-year (for an average endpoint OTP of 80.9 percent) although
the long-distance trains experienced a 0.5 percentage-point decrease from the previous year (for
an average endpoint OTP of 74.6 percent). While Amtrak experienced a slight deterioration in
OTP during FY 2010 compared to FY 2009, improvements can be made going forward with
further cooperation between Amtrak and the freight railroads, the implementation of the Metrics
and Standards under Section 207 of the PRIIA, and the ongoing implementation of the selected
State-sponsored investments under the FRA’s HSIPR program.